CAS judgement: UEFA ban overturned, City exonerated (report out p603)

[jonmcity]

The Chair does not vote unless they have too, so if not needed would say majority

 

[LongsightM13]

Good question but the media don't "investigate" anything any more. They write what agents, players, managers, club PR teams and gambling interests tell them to write. Plus we've clearly seen how far they're in bed with the cartel clubs.

It’s amazing yet depressingly predictable that none of them have either the will or the integrity to apply the most basic journalistic principle of ‘Cui bono’ - who benefits?

 

[Keeper!]

Good question but the media don't "investigate" anything any more. They write what agents, players, managers, club PR teams and gambling interests tell them to write. Plus we've clearly seen how far they're in bed with the cartel clubs.

Martin Samuel may be thinking differently.

 

[andyhinch]

It’s amazing yet depressingly predictable that none of them have either the will or the balls to apply the most basic journalistic principle of ‘Cui bono’ - who benefits?

Quick edit, money talks mate

 

[BigJoe#1]

Excellent piece, though I must take issue with the following comment:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall one media outlet (and I mean literally not a single fucking one) ever at any stage suggesting that City may prevail.

Whilst the Daily Mail as a publication may have had a negative view, Martin Samuels, throughout this saga has stuck his neck out and put his cock on the block in defending us. There can be no doubt about that , and as such we need to recognise our allies, we don't have too many of them.

 

[bluesoup]

Martin Samuel may be thinking differently.

Was expecting Martin to write an article on the ineptitude and ridiculousness of the case; all we got is a final part of a roundup editorial. Seems none of the main pack of reporters want to talk about editing emails, corruption and leaks.... just the non compliance which is a red herring to most in the know.

 

[projectriver]

I asked someone to read this legal opinion on Twitter and got this response:
“I’ve read it and I respectfully disagree. The author makes almost no mention of City’s failure to cooperate and no mention of the futility in trying to investigate corruption necessarily involving third parties.”
I put him right on non cooperation and its irrelevance to the main charge and I don’t even know what he’s on about with the second bit.

"investigate corruption necessarily involving third parties" - he/she sounds objective [eye roll]

 

[projectriver]

Excellent piece, though I must take issue with the following comment:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't recall one media outlet (and I mean literally not a single fucking one) ever at any stage suggesting that City may prevail.

Whilst the Daily Mail as a publication may have had a negative view, Martin Samuels, throughout this saga has stuck his neck out and put his cock on the block in defending us. There can be no doubt about that , and as such we need to recognise our allies, we don't have too many of them.

He didn't think we would prevail either. In fairness, people probably assumed that Uefa had some of that thing they call evidence. At least enough evidence to justify gratuitous allegations of deceit, concealment and false accounting. I think if that case had been brought in the High Court in England and lost, the Bar Council may have reprimanded the QC. Obviously the witness evidence could have looked very different in a full trial though and they would have had many more documents to play with.

 

[spiny]

I noticed in the CAS decision that all the awards in City's favour were by majority not unanimous. So who in the panel supported UEFA and being paid by the Cartel?

the judge they selected I suspect.

I am a layman who has been involved in mediation and arbitration but with no expertise regarding CAS and its procedures. Others may know better and I bow to their superior knowledge.

My guess is that the chair only casts a deciding vote where the two nominated judges disagree so a decision is always by majority. This would stop scrutiny of individual judges decisions and ensure a consistent recording of CAS panel decisions that is final.

 

[BigJoe#1]

Was expecting Martin to write an article on the ineptitude and ridiculousness of the case; all we got is a final part of a roundup editorial. Seems none of the main pack of reporters want to talk about editing emails, corruption and leaks.... just the non compliance which is a red herring to most in the know.

It was mentioned earlier in this thread that Martin Samuels had not commented on the CAS verdict and suggested he may be on holiday? I'd be surprised if he was as the football season is still alive and kicking, that said it may have been planned leave.

Still he has always been prepared to swim against the tide and be supportive of ( and critical where needs be) of City.